About your Search

20121121
20121129
STATION
CSPAN 7
CSPAN2 4
CNBC 2
CNNW 1
LANGUAGE
English 19
Search Results 0 to 18 of about 19 (some duplicates have been removed)
. a discussion of u.s. energy efforts and the energy policy of the obama administration in the next four years. >> we want to welcome back to our table, president and c.e.o. of the american petroleum institute. let's go back to campaign 2012. the american petroleum institute spent about $868,000 on the 2012 campaign cycle. total contributions, $650,000. contributions to candidates around $220,000. given that you spent a lot on republican governor mitt romney's bid spent more towards republicans, how will this impact your ability to communicate with the white house and the congress? what do you think your relationship will be like? guest: we ran a vote for energy campaign, which was focused on elevating energy to be a top draw issue. we believe was highly successful. both candidates were both giving a full endorsement of oil and natural gas as a key form of energy here in the united states to create jobs and help with our economic recovery. overall, the dollars we spent were not partisan in nature. we weren't supporting one candidate over the other, our candidate was energy and focused on eleva
rice failed to do something. and this is where the obama administration has leaved himself exposed. he never went to israel. i think now is probably not the time to get involved there but i think he's going to have to, in the second term, especially if these incidents show, they're going to try to do some middle east peace deal again. >> yeah, i mean you know, in addition to all of this which is a much more local conversation, we need to think in a broader sense. there's no big international moral voice on this question and i think until we have that kind of unquestionable, moral voice with an honest broker as well as a spiritual dimension this isn't going to get resolved by different types of policies. the record is clear. >> tim mak i want to ask you does the president see this as an opportunity to be the moral voice that tricia rose just talked to? >> if he does see the opportunity, he isn't really seizing on it. you haven't really seen him going out-front on the issue. you do see him giving speeches. you se
a lot of these discussions have been about how the republicans rolled back the obama administration, making we can then ultimately overtaken and how they maintain that power once they have it. i mean, cloaked in the argument of what is good for america, but there is not allow a policy prescription in there. >> thank you. >> this event took place at the seventeenth annual texas book festival in austin, texas. for more information visit texasbookfestival.org. >> tell us when you think of your programming this weekend. comment on our facebook call or send us an e-mail. nonfiction books every weekend on c-span2. >> next, chrystia freeland talked about a rise of the superrich, the.-- the top 0.one% of the population and the impact they have in the world. this is hosted by politics and prose bookstore in washington d.c. and it is about an hour. [applause] >> thanks a lot. sorry to keep everyone waiting. i will say a few things about what is in the book. as i have been doing some interviews with my book, a favored way of interviewers in the conversation is to save the rich have always been
and the obama administration. why? all over their response to the attack in benghazi. well, today both sides came face to face. you are about to hear what happened inside that meeting and why those senators are not satisfied today. but, first, the urgent situation that has everyone's attention, members of the house, they're officially back to work as of right now, this hour. senators returned to washington yesterday. so everyone finally on the job after their week long thanksgiving break. that gives congress and the president, count it with me, 35 days to avoid the dreaded fiscal cliff, the huge package of tax hikes and spending cuts set to take effect january 1 if congress and the president do not cut a deal. we're told they have been talking behind the scenes and president obama has already hosted congressional leaders for a post election sit-down. but the president is also launching a new pr effort, a campaign, some are calling it here, starting with the white house meeting today, of small business owners. then tomorrow, the president hosts more business owners and a group of middle class
. bankruptcy. >> that's right. there's no question as taxpayer bailout coming here. look, the government, obama administration just loves sub prime mortgages. this whole enterprise, this fha, is really a garner to of sub prime mortgages and taxpayers are going to pay big time larry. >> as though we haven't learned anything from $140 billion bailout of fanny and freddy. correct me if i'm wrong, but 40%, roughly, 40% of the loans that they insured just under the last year or two, have been sub prime loans. they haven't learned a thing. >> they haven't learned a thing. or maybe they just don't care. but yes, you're absolutely right. 40% sub prime loans. moreover what it is, is people who have gone through one, sometimes two foreclosures, bankruptcies and have razor thin down payments. for some reason, that i cannot possibly fathom, there is this push to quote unquote demock ra advertise credit. what is wrong with renting? why would someone through two foreclosures be put into a new loan. and what is it going to do for that person? look what happened to minorities with the housing crash. >> is the
. now, look at the role of private enterprise and public education and what the obama administration approach will be in 2013. this is an hour and 35 minutes. >> welcome. thank you for joining us. we are just getting back. the energy level is probably going to get mellow. we will make that work for us. today's panel is on the question of for-profit and federal education policy. this is a topic that we at aei have been talking about for an extended stretch. in support of the templeton foundation, we have been running the private enterprise projects, trying to think about the opportunities and the challenge. how do make this work for kids in the communities? how do we think about some of those challenges the potential perils? this panel is a close up series of panels and conversations. we have commissioned a number of pieces that will be coming up as a book this spring. we have the opportunity to work. those of you with cell phones, in turn them off. why this topic? the vast majority of what we do in america k-12 is done by public institutions. it is done by institutions run by states.
decade i see the debt run up under the bush administration is a comparable amount under the obama administration. this seems to me to be a legacy of an extraordinary amount of. [inaudible] and yet we have a lot of economic problems and now our sovereign debt is roughly around gdp and this is the point in which at least in europe, investors have begun questioning it so i am curious in what way future funding would be posed as a solution to problems that the past was not and how can it be financed? >> sorry, i don't buy the premise first of all. [applause] look, we had a stimulus bill, which was about $800 billion. that is a very small part of the debt we have and none of the results of an economic stimulus so where's this coming from? the rest of it is, we have a large amount of debt or a large amount of -- we ran a deficit even during the good years which people like myself don't think was a good idea. why? because we first wanted to give tax cuts to langsam individuals and have a couple of unfunded wars. that has nothing to do is pump grinding and then we had a collapse of revenu
administration, a roughly comparable amount under the obama administration. this 10 dribble seems seems to a leg say leg say -- and -- this is the point at which, at least in europe, investors have begun to question the capacity of the country to repay the debt. so i'm curious in what way future funding would be -- would be posted as a solution to problems that the pacifism past -- past pump fining was not and how can it be financed. >> i don't buy the premise, first of all. look, we had a stimulus bill which was about 800 billion. that a very small part of the debt we have. none of it was a result of the economic stimulus. so where is this coming from? the rest of it is we have large amount of debt that was -- a large opt -- we ran deficits even during good years, which even people like myself don't think is a good idea. why? because george bush wanted to give tax cuts to high income individuals and have a couple of unfunded wars. that has nothing to do with pump priming. the enwe had a collapse of revenue that took place after 2007, which is the result of a severe downturn and financial crisis
. >> there is one federal policy change that says a second term obama administration might push. is there one that comes to mind? >> i would like to see -- i would like to see the conversation around gainful employment extend beyond the career and for-profit colleges to the entire sector and shining a light on more of the outcomes there. the second part to me is the biggest challenge with the gainful employment regulations as they stand now, we have suggested our own counter mechanism. the biggest problem is that it's an all or nothing access to cash. you either clear up our and have access to the federal loan dollars from title for -- from title 4, or you get zero out completely. the problem is -- you want to extend access to population to have not had a historical access to education. on the other hand, you are interested in quality in a very admittedly tough environment. you can make quality high because of the wage scale back the access. the other side, if you make that are too low, the lead in all the bad actors who do bad things and take advantage and may not ask the right questions up
doing it now? the obama administration will have an opportunity to look at these proposals in november and december and hopefully decide to take advantage of them and use them next year. also i am hopeful and will recommend that this not just be administrative action. congress should implement this, too. beyond that, we will have the proper recommendations with regard to other issues of security, jobs, efficiencies, innovation. this is such an important part of our economy in america. if we do not do it in the right way, we will make mistakes. when you legislate an atmosphere of crisis, where you have a mess on your hands, you quite often do not do it very well. yes, we are experiencing some good times in energy diversity now. it seems to me now is the opportunity and a fantastic time of challenge for us to develop an overall, the national energy policy to pull things together and plan for the future and not wait for another crisis. another crisis will come. when you look at the impact of energy throughout the world, what is happening with us and how we are all interrelated, it is obvi
about things like that and in this era, when i look at the amount of time, particularly in the obama administration, if you look at senior officials go to asia throughout the region and they have meetings or others and also the discussion that tends to coordinate with china, there seems to be a lot of efforts try to coordinate. looking out the value of the in the dispute and said that they were shocked and surprised by the level of miscommunication and assessment and the dangers of that between china and japan. so raises the question of whether or not -- i agree with you. i know china wants respect. but whether or not what you are seeing is a strategic or taxable gain by china to use this potential mr. stutzman to look like the unstable part in some of this to help push up the own interest. and that worries me a little bit. >> it is not of domination will respect. it is about whether it will be static or where the agreement will be dynamic. and there is no way that nations are going to agree on what will be the interest. it becomes explosive. >> the issue really is china, india, comp
middle class families, the obama administration had asked middle class families to tell their stories about how it would impact them if congress followed the president's plan and extended those bush era tax cuts. today 85 of those people who responded to that request will be here at the white house meeting with the president. today the white house is also launching hash tag my 2 k on twitter for people to send in more experiences. it stands for my 2,000, a reference to $2,200 that the president says middle class families will save if the bush era tax cuts are extended. it's part of a push to get americans to press their elected leaders to make a deal to extend the tax cuts for everyone except those families making over $250,000. republicans have said they're prepared to talk about raising taxes on wealthier americans if democrats will agree to cut entitlement spending. which the white house seemed to agree with. >> it is the president's position that when we're talking about a broad balanced approach to dealing with our fiscal challenges, that that includes dealing with entitlements.
after the financial crisis in the early days of the obama administration. crucially for the sec, she took office right after the exposure of the bernie madoff scandal. and the sec has been struggling to put the pieces together ever since then. take a look at some of the highlights over at the sec. the sec pointing out this morning that they've had more enforcement actions than ever before in the past two years. 735 actions in 2011 and 734 in 2012. and the sec is now engaged in one of the busiest rule-making periods in decades and pointing out that her response to the frash crash included requiring exchanges to create a consolidated audit trail. this is a pretty well rolled out announcement here today. we saw the leak to the "new york times," then the official announcement and then a few minutes ago, the sec put out an e-mail entitled some of the accomplishments under mary shapiro's tenure. also going to hear from a lot of the critics of the sec. some on the left saying she has not gone far enough. the sec has not gone far enough and some on the right saying that dodd/frank and the re
if things got bad. in this era, when i look at the amount of time -- the obama administration more so than the bush administration, when officials meet throughout the region, and the discussion attempt to correlate with china, there seems to be a lot of effort to try to coordinate. jim steinberg was the fourth member of this panel, looking at the island dispute and said, they were shocked and surprised by the level of miscommunication, miss assessment, and the dangers of that between china and japan. it raises the question of whether or not -- i agree. i know china wants respect -- but whether or not what you're seeing is a strategic game or tactical game by china to use this potential mis assessment to look like the unstable part in some of this to basically helped push out its own interest. that worries me a little bit. >> i think the essential question is not of domination or respect, but about whether [indiscernible] will be static or dynamic. there is no way nations are going to agree on what the consider to be the interests. you drop a little bit of energy into this thing and it beco
a new tax bill. the fact that obama is administration is to make it sound like he is averting a catastrophe over the post 2013 -- it is an insult to people who know what is going on. host: if you think that -- do you think the president is not holding from one democratic beliefs? calving i really do not know. i just found out that ed rendell is supposedly a little type of democrat. he is one -- on one of these teams trying to figure out entitlements. this is a simple equation. we have about $800 billion more than necessary in spending. we have $800 billion more in spending that goes into the pockets of those who run unnecessary tests, insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies. and if we relocate the like most of the rational world by civil nationalizing health care, that will take care of 80% of the problem. the other 20% has to do with the spending on the military that puts people in countries that nobody can identify on the back in order -- that nobody can identify on the bath. >> chuck in illinois, on our line for republicans, what do you think? caller: i am kind of
they are ready for it. the obama administration is ready to fill vacancies. this will have rebels all the way down the hierarchy. what i would like to discuss tonight is how we got from where we are, the politics of patronage, the challenges of recruiting political appointees, how the system results in major delays and managerial destructions and how it undermines presidential leadership and good management. and finally, possible remedies for reforming the system. why do we get mad at government incompetence? because we expect a competent and effective bureaucracy. you create bureaucracies that hire competent workers that bring specialization, expertise, accountability, and continuity. there is no alternative in large-scale systems to organize great amounts of people to accomplish a goal or mission. this is not the way the united states began. it took about a century to figure it out and half a century to implement. the spoils system of the nineteenth century, there has been a constant tension between partisan control political appointees in career experts. let's take a quick look back at the
leafy campuses that gave us an administration who sees government as the dream replacement. as young folks are saddled with debt and unemployment, obama wishes to expand the government reach, raising taxes on those laboring under the old dream. how can anyone believe in a dream when the leaders don't? they look stagnant earth and say that is better. america may enter a nationally recurring nightmare, i don't mean the one where dana and jasper show up as house gues guests. you hate the american dream so you are happy about this. >> dana: i haven't lived it at all. 60% of recent college grads can't find a job in what they studied, in the profession they chose. one of five bachelor degree holders are unemployed and 40% live at home. you can understand why they are upset about the future. i bet the poll is correct. >> greg: it's clear you don't care. is the american dream dead and should obama be impeached? >> kimberly: i saw that on the street corner today. >> bob: kimberly is eating. you ate it all. >> kimberly: i'm hiding it from you. >> greg: so you agree with me president obama shou
to you a little bit about the campaign as we move forward. the obama campaign, this is jim messina. he's talking about taking the campaign and sort of using it as a model for how they run the administration going forward. >> people just spent five years winning two presidential elections together. they're now not going to walk away and not help him you know, become the change they want to see. >> you know, this obviously i think, is a great idea. not just grassroots. go in, frame every issue the way you frame mitt romney then you'll have success with the issues that you're trying to legislate. >> you know, they're turning a technology-based situation -- they're using a technology-based analogy for what should be the mode of governance in which you articulate your policy in a compelling way and you make sure everyone gets it and everyone knows what's going on. so yeah, that's called leadership last time i looked. and building consensus or at least building networks of agreement to allow you to govern. so in that sense
Search Results 0 to 18 of about 19 (some duplicates have been removed)